What business does an internet search engine company have with the leadership of a foreign power which also happens to be an enemy of the United States? According to top human rights groups like Amnesty International, they want to sell the Chinese “a censored version of its search engine” in order to “violate the freedom of expression and privacy rights of millions of internet users in the country.”

The history of the company is strange. Those of us old enough to remember Google’s launch in 1998 may also recall that the fledgling newcomer to the internet search engine business was rich enough to take out full-page newspaper ads flaunting its competitive superiority. It was clear from the outset that Google meant to dominate market share.

Up until that time, America Online (AOL) was the only online corporation with a sophisticated promotional campaign that included mailing so many free installation disks that folks began to use them for drink coasters. 1998 was the same year Microsoft renamed their ISP (internet service provider) service from The Microsoft Network to MSN Internet Access and began to push the MSN brand. However, the company was still figuring out how to market online services effectively.

Not so with Google. Within a month or two of launching their media marketing blitz, the nation began to use the company’s name as a substitute for the phrase “to search online” – and still does. This writer had never seen such rapid mind-control programming regarding the tech sector and was concerned about who was behind the instant institutionalization of Google.

Please understand that, as a search engine, the Google product was far better than its competition. Google announced proudly its intention to build algorithms (programmed instructions that tell a computer what to do or how to solve specific problems) to add “semantics” to online searching. Using context as well as keyword matching when evaluating online queries (searches), the new search engine would be able to outperform all the other web robots tasked with “spidering” the World Wide Web – crawling around it, figuratively speaking, looking for content to analyze.

Compared to W3Catalog (the very first search engine), Aliweb, Infoseek, Webcrawler, Altavista, Lycos, and Ask Jeeves (renamed Ask.com), Google delivered the goods as useful links to online content in response to all kinds of questions and searches.

But recent news headlines confirm the creepy feeling that Google is not a user-friendly organization. Consider this from Infowars – the alternative media news source that so threatens the mainstream narrative that all the major social media platforms banned it last week:

“YOUTUBE MEDDLES IN SWEDISH ELECTION BY DELETING RIGHT-WING CONTENT – Massive censorship just 13 days before the vote”

Guess who owns YouTube, the dominating international self-publishing platform for video content? Starts with a ‘G’ and rhymes with ‘oogle,’ that’s who. Joining the ranks of media controllers who have instructions from the intelligence community to silence the noisiest dissenters, YouTube executives are parroting the trendy and oh-so-politically-correct accusation of hate speech to target and neutralize opposing views.

Recently, according to Infowars:

“A satirical cartoon video that lampooned Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven was deleted within two hours after YouTube deemed it to contain ‘hateful’ content. The short film, entitled ‘To Make it Right,’ made fun out of numerous Swedish politicians for their obsession with being politically correct. Apparently, this now qualifies as hate speech in the Scandinavian country.”

Last July, thirteen days before the Swedish elections, YouTube deleted and then restored the entire video channel operated by a right-wing political party called Alternative for Sweden. In response, Alternative for Sweden called the episode a “complete scandal” in a tweet that continued:

“YouTube is again on the offensive and censors all options for Sweden’s video clips.”

In early August 2018, YouTube summarily deleted a video on the Sweden Democrats channel which linked the Social Democrats party to the Nazi regime. Again, the charge from the social media controller was hate speech contained in the historical fact-based report. An indignant tweet from the Swedish Dems read:

“For two days our documentary on the history of the Social Democrats was published on YouTube. In a short amount of time the footage received 190,000 views before it was removed. We are waiting for an explanation.”

It turns out that Google was the brainchild of the U.S. intelligence community who envisioned a future internet that would no longer be free (as it was in the late 1990s), but controlled by government forces with the ability to block user access, limit content, and track people online.

The partnering of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA) with the brightest brains in computer science was, from the start, a dark, Orwellian plot. According to Jeff Nesbit, writing for Quartz late last year:

“The intelligence community hoped that the nation’s leading computer scientists could take non-classified information and user data, combine it with what would become known as the internet, and begin to create for-profit, commercial enterprises to suit the needs of both the intelligence community and the public. They hoped to direct the supercomputing revolution from the start in order to make sense of what millions of human beings did inside this digital information network. That collaboration has made a comprehensive public-private mass surveillance state possible today.”

The problem Google solved was not how to collect vast amounts of personal user information, but how to make meaningful sense out of it all. The military mindset realized that scientific problem solvers held the key to ruling the internet and turning it into a fascist tool against the common good.

Consider how far we’ve come from the first CIA/NSA briefing with top university computer scientists in 1995. The intelligence community had already conceived their goal: to take all data available and sort it into meaningful categories to group people by their online activities, interests and purchases.

According to Nesbit, in early 1995, the Fairmont Hotel in San Jose, California (part of the new Silicon Valley) hosted the “Birds of a Feather Session on the Intelligence Community Initiative in Massive Digital Data Systems” unclassified briefing. The Deep State operatives wanted a digital fingerprint tracking system so they posed this challenge to the geeks:

“Could an entire world of digital information be organized so that the requests humans made inside such a network be tracked and sorted? Could their queries be linked and ranked in order of importance? Could ‘birds of a feather’ be identified inside this sea of information so that communities and groups could be tracked in an organized way?”

You Might Like

The short answer is yes.

From digital fingerprint scans into a national (or global) database, citizens have lost their right to privacy in so many other known ways: notably, as disclosed in 2013 by insider whistle-blower Edward Snowden, the NSA illegally began to collect all private user data to store away for future analysis, if and should the perceived need arise. They still do.

In fact, both aisles of Congress passed a bill to renew both the NSA’s Prism and Upstream programs on to President Trump for his final approval. These programs spy on internet traffic of foreigners outside the United States. However, some incidental data is also collected on unwitting U.S. citizens who communicate with NSA-targeted foreigners.

Although Operations Prism and Upstream involve blatant civil rights violations, both programs are legally authorized and warranted. How exactly does that work again?

Nesbit observed:

“It almost seems like mass global surveillance of the internet isn’t controversial in the US anymore.”

Google is helping China and Japan perfect their choke-hold surveillance state systems. Britain and the United States are well on their way in this direction. You can bet other nations will follow, creating a network of global media tyranny, the ultimate tool to spread statist propaganda and suppress all opposing voices.

5 Comments

Post Author

Post Author

Post Author

Wow! I knew it all along that privacy was not possible. I was aware that when I tried to search government organizations to file complaints for violations my searches were blocked. If I managed to obtain some other way to file the complaint, it was deleted after I invested lengthy emotions of the adverse experience of being violated by government agency, i.e., by police officers obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, discrimination, bias, corruption and colluding with the Judges of the Superior Court in San Diego, California to protect a Corporation from accountability for a Battery by a Mexican Male Manager at an Office Depot, Inc. My physical injuries, not including emotional trauma, are so severe that I am still getting Occupational and Physical Therapy in my entire right side of body, foot, hip, back, entire arm, elbow, wrist. It happened on 9/9/2017. I am a citizen of the U.S. a person of integrity, honor, and strength to stand up to justice. So, I suspected the information I just read. However, where is all this going to lead us as a United, U.S.A.?

Post Author

Post Author

Good article. But, In the first paragraph you describe China as an enemy of the United States. Could be. But, if so, why are so many, many consumer products sold in the U.S. labeled “Made in China”. With all the goods we buy, and our massive trade deficit, we are in fact, financing the military of our “enemy”! Greed can be a terrible thing. Hope we never see the day……..